Response to interpellation 2023/24:371 on all children's and young people's right to active leisure time and culture

Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)

Mr. Speaker! Mattias Vepsä has asked me what measures I am taking so that cultural workers and cultural institutions can cope with the economic crisis. He has also asked me if I have analyzed how the economic cuts affect people's participation in cultural and leisure activities and if I can, in that case, report the outcome of the analysis.

To begin with, I want to state that we find ourselves in a situation with both economic and security policy challenges that affect all areas of society. The government has therefore had to make tough prioritizations in the budget.

Culture is financed in large parts and for a long time now jointly by the state, the regions, and the municipalities. It is therefore important that we can continue our cooperation so that our joint funds can be used in the absolute best way, not least in times that require tough prioritizations. During 2024, the general state grants to regions and municipalities have been strengthened by 10 billion kronor, which creates improved economic conditions and reduces the need for cuts in operations in municipalities and regions.

It is also important to emphasize that the state does not have ownership of institutions at the regional and local level. It is usually the regions and municipalities that provide the ownership and the mandates for the activities. However, the state makes a significant contribution to regional and local culture through, among other things, the cultural cooperation model. This model has recently been reviewed by a special investigator, and the report is currently out for broad consultation until March 27, 2024. Naturally, other state initiatives shall also benefit the entire country.

The Government, in last year's budget bill for 2023, announced an initiative for leisure cards for children and young people between 8 and 16 years of age. The leisure card shall provide children and young people with an active and meaningful leisure time in community with others through increased access to leisure activities within sports, culture, outdoor life, and other association life. Access to physical activity and the practice of culture and outdoor life is important to promote good health, meaningful leisure time, and quality of life.

The government has also extended the state development grant to the municipal cultural school and allocates a total of 100 million kronor per year 2024-2026.

Regarding the second question, if I have analyzed how the economic cuts affect people's participation in cultural and leisure activities, participation is a central part of the national cultural policy goals. The Government follows up on the work to achieve the goals with the support of, for example, the Swedish Agency for Cultural Analysis, which has the task, based on the national cultural policy goals, to evaluate, analyze, and report on the effects of proposals and implemented measures within the cultural field.

If participation has been affected during 2024, it is a bit too early to comment on that, but I look forward to following that as well moving forward.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Mattias Vepsä (S)

Mr. Speaker! I note that I received a no on my first question, regarding whether the government and the minister intend to take any political initiatives whatsoever to remedy the cost crisis that the country's municipalities and regions, but also the cultural life, find themselves in.

I also note that the Minister does not seem to have analyzed the situation. It is remarkable. I intend to return to that in my speech, because it surely cannot in any way be a surprise that Sweden is in an inflation crisis.

The entire election campaign was about how we would best meet the security policy threat that Parisa Liljestrand mentions in her response - how we would arm Sweden strongly for the security policy situation we see, with war in Ukraine, in our immediate vicinity, but also how we would arm the country's municipalities and regions strongly to ensure that we can maintain our welfare. I perceived, in any case, that very much of the election debate was about just that.

We lost the election, as is known. Instead, the country received an SD-led government.

For a year now, at least I have analyzed the situation regarding children and young people and culture, sports and leisure in our country. I lead a working group that the Socialdemokraterna have appointed.

I can state that very much is known. But we know that class has an enormous impact on whether one participates in cultural life. We know that geography in the sense of distance and whether one lives in central parts of our cities matters a lot. We also know that economy is an important factor for children and young people, which this interpellation is about, to have the means and opportunity to participate in sports and outdoor life.

We also know that other factors such as cultural background and gender are used to explain that we live in different worlds. Some participate in culture, sports, and outdoor life to an enormous extent, and others stand far away.

With the crisis we find ourselves in, the gaps and differences in our country are growing. Household finances have deteriorated in recent years. The SD government seems to stand passive in the face of the crisis that ordinary people are now suffering through. We see that ten years of real wage increases have been erased and that food prices have shot up sharply and risen more than in comparable countries in our vicinity.

But to the point. This has also affected our municipal cultural schools, which are forced to cut costs. Nine out of ten cultural schools are cutting costs. We see how inflation is pressing the culture and leisure departments and the politicians in municipalities across the country. Four out of five state institutions are cutting costs, and 55 percent of the country's municipalities say that they are making cuts in precisely children's and young people's leisure and cultural activities.

I intended to return to what I was going to comment on – that politics is about prioritization. This is the second year that the government is governing under inflation. It is the second budget that the government has presented in this chamber. It is the second time that the government prioritizes large tax cuts for the country's wealthiest and lets ordinary people pay. How is it that the government makes that prioritization and pressures ordinary people instead of ensuring that we save all children's and young people's opportunities for an active leisure time?

With that, I would like to ask the question again. Will the Minister implement initiatives so that all children and young people can participate in the country's cultural and sports activities?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Emma Ahlström Köster (M)

Mr. Speaker! Yes, there is a big difference between an S-led government and a Moderate-led one. We look at the whole. We see the families, and we see the entire economy. That is what makes a difference and decides whether one can prioritize a leisure activity, which often lies further down. It lies further down in relation to everything else, such as housing and being able to move back and forth to work and drive one's car.

The interpellator comes from Stockholm, if I am not misinformed, and there they have just raised the tax. It is the opposite of what a Moderate politician or a Moderate leadership would do. For us, it is more important that families themselves have control over their finances - that they get more power to choose what they want to do and what they have the possibility to do based on their economic circumstances.

The government's tax cuts provide precisely these conditions - more freedom for families to decide for themselves what they want to do and what they want to prioritize.

I agree with the description that the interpellator outlined, namely that there is a large difference between those who have the opportunity to attend leisure activities today and those who are far away from it. We see the same thing. We see that there are groups that have higher thresholds and who find it more difficult to attend leisure activities for various reasons – economic and cultural. That is why this initiative is so good. We see the problems with our eyes wide open and want to help. We want to make a difference for those who are furthest away.

In addition to 10 billion kronor in general state grants, which the municipalities themselves have the opportunity to use to strengthen various initiatives, we are also making an investment in the leisure card. And I cannot emphasize enough how important and special it is. I have spent some time seeing if there have been similar investments previously, for example when the Social Democratic government was at the helm. But I cannot find anything that targets the group that stands furthest away.

With the investment in the leisure card, more children and young people will have the opportunity to participate in sports. More children and young people will have the opportunity to engage in a cultural activity - perhaps learn to play an instrument - but also engage in outdoor life. It is so fantastic and unique with the tradition that we have with Swedish outdoor life. This government wants more children and young people to have the opportunity to experience that.

The interpellator writes in their interpellation that the government's policy of lower taxes, more freedom, and a leisure card would be a betrayal and increase the gaps. But there we probably see completely different views on what policy makes a difference. I do not see this as a finished solution where everything is settled, but as a first step to save those who are furthest away.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Linus Sköld (S)

Mr. Speaker! Both the Minister and Emma Ahlström Köster speak of 10 billion kronor more in general state grants. SVT has reported on the effects of this. The effects are that 55 percent of the municipalities will cut their culture budgets, and only 9 percent of the municipalities manage to increase the culture budget with inflation. That is what the support that the Moderate-led government gives is about.

When it comes to the income tax cut that is supposed to give families so much greater freedom to choose for themselves what they want to use their money for, it is very clear that it is going incredibly poorly for the economically most vulnerable households with the government's policy. The income tax cut for low- and middle-income earners, as it is usually called, actually does not apply to everyone. For those who are permanently unable to work as a result of an illness or disability, there will be no tax cut at all. And for those who do receive a tax cut, it is calculated in percent. The average tax cut is 2,400 kronor per earner. But for those who have the lowest incomes, the tax cut is significantly less than that.

The effects that this can be expected to have on culture must be extremely marginal. And the effects for those with the lowest incomes when it comes to getting better conditions to participate in cultural activities must be on the verge of non-existent.

Then I come to the question of the leisure card. It has been the Christian Democrats' major flagship in cultural policy for quite a long time, and now they have gotten it into the government negotiations. But it is clearly something that is stalling. The space tax, the government managed to abolish in one fell swoop. But the government has talked about the leisure card since it took office. This year there is a budget for the leisure card. But we have not yet seen either any timetable for the introduction or how it exactly is to be constructed. I would therefore like the government representative here to clarify this. How is the leisure card to be constructed, and when will households get access to it?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)

Mr. Speaker! The question I received from the interpellor was: Will the government take measures so that more children and young people can participate in leisure activities and culture? Then the member answered his own question somewhat rhetorically and said: I believe I have received a no as an answer.

Then I just want to inform the members once more that I did not say no to the government carrying out a series of measures. It is about, for example, strengthening and improving the conditions for cultural creators. The government has, among other things, reinforced the support and compensations that go to individual cultural creators via Konstnärsnämnden and Sveriges Författarfond. Additionally, we have made more long-term scholarships possible. We have also strengthened the economic situation for, among others, authors and translators whose works are lent out at libraries, by raising the basic amount. The government has also allocated special funds for scholarships within the field of words.

These are just a few examples of what we are doing to enable better conditions for cultural workers. In addition to that, several parallel tracks are also underway linked to, among other things, a discussion on the security systems, where the government has announced that it will return to the Riksdag with proposals for a new unemployment insurance that can be expected to increase predictability in the insurance coverage, especially for those who have irregular or varying incomes. We know that there are many in that industry whom we care about and who are so-called gig workers.

In addition to these investments and the investments in the municipal culture school and literacy promotion, the leisure card for children and young people is a central initiative from the government. Furthermore, the government has maintained the offer of free admission for children and young people at central museums.

Here I have listed some of the priorities and things the government is doing to enable more children and young people to participate in leisure and cultural activities.

Just as Emma Ahlström Köster said, this is a system that is interconnected. Society is interconnected. We therefore cannot look at one part at a time, but we must look at the whole. And here it is fully reasonable for the government to make a series of interventions in order to be able to strengthen both the conditions for cultural creators and the opportunities for children and young people to participate in and practice culture.

We are allocating 10 billion kronor in general government grants to municipalities and regions because we believe that municipalities and regions themselves best make their own prioritizations of where the money is needed.

We are implementing a tax cut for low- and middle-income earners because we believe it is perfectly reasonable for people to choose for themselves what they want and need to spend their money on.

In addition to that, we carry out, among other things, some of the measures that I have listed.

Therefore, I do not believe that the answer to the question can be no, but this is the answer to the question. And it is only a fraction of what the government does in the work to ensure both that cultural workers have fair conditions and that children and young people get to participate in culture.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Mattias Vepsä (S)

Mr. Speaker! I thank you for the answer. I also thank Emma Ahlström Köster for participating in this debate.

I will start in Stockholm. Stockholm is a fantastic city. It is the country's capital. And it is a red-green government both in Region Stockholm and in Stockholm City Hall.

In Region Stockholm, the Social Democratic-led government must now clean up after 16 years of right-wing rule which has entailed large-scale marketization, deficits, and problems in healthcare. It is clear that we in our region chose to raise the tax when the state underfunded the support to the country's regions. It is 18 of 21 regions that are running large deficits. We said: This betrayal of the staff and of those who need healthcare is unreasonable – we raise the tax and ensure that we can invest money in healthcare.

We also make it possible for children and young people to travel cheaper with the subway, commuter trains, and buses in our region, which is actually also a way to ensure that they can participate better in leisure activities. In the city of Stockholm, we also choose to raise taxes to meet the financing of the school.

I return to the theme of the debate. More and more schools are warning that the government's underfunding of culture in schools means that we are now seeing cuts even in schools when it comes to children's and young people's culture. I believe it was yesterday that it was pointed out that many municipalities are concerned about this.

The resource-rich schools, where there are passionate individuals and resources to get cultural workers or performances to come, might manage. But there are concerns that the country's municipalities will not manage to offer culture in schools to the extent that would have been possible if the state grants had instead been increased. In exactly the same way, several municipalities are now saying that they cannot manage the culture for children and young people when it comes to the culture school.

My question regarding the culture and art practitioners - the cultural workers - also belongs with this. It may have been too drastic to say that everything is rotten in the Moderate-led cultural policy, because that is not the case; the Minister listed some parts that we can absolutely agree on, for example, investments in the cultural workers' security systems. That is something that we initiated and, among other things, investigated during our time in government. I think it is good that we get security systems and other investments, such as scholarships, in place. But while one gives with one hand, one takes away with the other hand a large part of the cultural workers' opportunities all around the country.

They are cutting the support for folkbildningen (popular education), which is extremely important for the local and regional arts and cultural life. It is part of the cultural soil. The Cultural Inquiry points out that our study associations, folk high schools, and folkbildningen have an enormously important role, and indirectly they are a very important employer for very many. There, they are making cuts in the hundreds of millions, completely without performing any consequence analyses.

I amused myself by looking at the claim that the Social Democrats have not invested in these areas. During our time in government, the culture budget grew to a record size. We see now instead how the culture budget is not being increased. We increased the appropriation and the development grant to the culture school, which is now being halved. We see that the schools during our time had the opportunity to do their job in the cultural area, and we also wanted to take the lead and say that aesthetic subjects are important for all the country's upper secondary school students. That was voted down here in the chamber by a right-wing majority.

Thus we return to the core of the matter: Politics is about priorities. Why are luxury-roots, luxury-ruts, and large tax cuts for the country's wealthiest more important than ensuring the cultural infrastructure for children and young people in our country?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Emma Ahlström Köster (M)

Mr. Speaker! I am appalled when I hear this type of rhetoric. As if tax cuts were some kind of luxury product! That is not what it is about. A tax cut affects us all. It affects everyone who works. Whether one is a nursing assistant or works at a preschool, a tax cut benefits everyone who does their part to contribute. It benefits people's ability to have control over their own lives.

I truly interpret it as the interpellor underestimating the effect of the tax cuts. It is clear that not all the money one saves goes directly to culture, but it enables it. For those who want to give their children more leisure activities, they enable this. It may not be about huge amounts of money, but that money can be the difference between whether one can do it or not. Of course, it is also the case that families who keep more in their wallets – who can afford to fuel their car – can spend more money on leisure activities.

I believe we would all have wished that the leisure card was in place. I interpret the Social Democratic debaters as being positive about this nonetheless. It actually doesn't matter which party submitted the proposal – a wise policy that yields results should be embraced.

An investigation is ongoing, and that is because we want to ensure that the money in the leisure card actually goes exactly where it should, that is to the children and young people who today stand furthest away from leisure activities. We cannot roll out a system that is not completely finished; it must be watertight and finished when it is launched. We look forward to it coming very soon.

I am truly proud of the policy that the government is pursuing in the cultural area. I understand that it is difficult for you in the Social Democrats to admit it, but I believe that you also, deep down, realize that politics and economics are connected - and that it also has a positive effect on culture.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Linus Sköld (S)

Mr. Speaker! The Minister for Culture is talking about the investment in the Kulturskolan. I think it is on the verge of being outrageous to call a halving of the targeted grant an investment.

I asked a question about the leisure card. When will it arrive, and how will it be constructed? Emma Ahlström Köster says it will be coming very soon, but the minister ignores the question. I think she should address it.

We see that 91 percent of the municipalities are cutting the culture budget. In that situation, both the Minister and Emma Ahlström Köster respond that it is tax cuts that will be the cultural policy reform. Just as the first job tax credits were not cultural policy reforms, despite Lena Adelsohn Liljeroth's attempts to frame them as such, the seventy-first job tax credit will also not increase people's opportunities to participate in culture - especially not low-income earners.

The result of the government's failed policy is clear. It is a record in debts at the Enforcement Authority; Swedes' debts at the Enforcement Authority increased by 50 million kronor a day last year. It is a record in evictions of families with children. It is a record in profits for the big banks. There are tax increases in the municipal sector, and there are cuts to make the budget balance. It is the result of the failed policy.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)

Mr. Speaker! I might start by addressing the issue of the leisure card by saying that the government will come back to it. It is currently being investigated, and they are looking at how the construction should look. The government will come back to the issue; that is what I can say.

I must say that it becomes very clear that there are ideological differences between the government's parties, including the Moderates and the Social Democrats. I think that is good. I think it is important that we show our differences so that people realize what they get with different types of politics.

I also think it is interesting that the Social Democrats argue that the tax cuts will not have a particularly large impact. They link it to the fact that people's debt is increasing - and completely detach it from the economic reality that people have lived in during the last one and a half to two years. We have, therefore, had the most difficult economic situation in decades, with inflation that has remained sky-high. It is the inflation that has eroded people's wages and real wages. It is that which is the basis for why municipalities and regions have difficulty balancing their finances. It is that which is the basis for why society actually becomes generally more eroded.

That is why the government's policy is to press down inflation and ensure a sustainable economic policy that, in the long run, will enable society to continue to prosper - and which will give people the space to make their own choices. Here we differ, because I believe it matters.

I believe that people themselves need to be given the opportunity to decide over a larger part of their income. We shall bear society collectively. It is fine to pay tax, as it is called. And that is what it is, for it builds the society that we are collectively here to protect.

But it cannot be negative that people themselves get a greater degree of freedom and a larger scope of freedom when it comes to what they want to prioritize spending their money on. If it had only been about a tax cut, I might have been able to buy the Social Democrats' reasoning to a greater extent, but that is not what it is about.

We must look at the budget as a whole and at the investments that the government is making in all areas. It is this that carries the economic policy.

We must have a policy that enables culture school throughout the country for as many children and young people as possible. But for it to be able to work, parents must dare to let their children go to the practices. They must feel secure that the children will come home from the piano lessons.

Here we see the legacy that the government has received from the previous, Social Democratic government. We have high crime. We have crime and gang violence. We have a security situation that is the most serious since the Second World War. We have inflation and an economic recession that we are in. In this, the government carries the country forward through its budget and its policy. That is what I am proud of.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Mattias Vepsä (S)

Mr. Speaker! We are carrying the country through the crisis, says the minister. I would say that it is the ordinary people who are carrying the country through the crisis and are taking the biggest hits.

If I may take up the thread and speak about the crime prevention and the promotional work, I wonder why it is important to save on just the country's municipalities.

There has been a lot of talk about reality, and I wonder in which reality the government finds itself in Rosenbad. I do not believe it is the reality I find myself in when I visit schools in Huddinge and talk with sports leaders, leisure leaders, and others. DN writes about this. There we can read that the youth today choose to participate in the activities before the basketball practice begins, because they can no longer afford to pay the membership fee in the association. But before the basketball practice begins, they can join in and play. That is how it looks in Sweden today. That is the reality.

Then I must ask a question to the Minister. Does she believe that gangs find it easier or harder to recruit children and young people in an environment where the country's sports clubs, cultural centers, youth centers, schools, welfare institutions, and state cultural institutions are forced to save money? The result of a year of government policy led by the SD-moderates is that four out of five institutions must save. The Nationalmuseum closes on Tuesdays. The roof is collapsing at the Naturhistoriska – due to lack of maintenance, but this occurred under the government's responsibility, so we must add this to the account of successes. The country's municipalities are also forced today to cut back on cultural and leisure activities.

That the minister brings up crime prevention in a reality where so many do more for less money makes me feel like the blush pillow should be brought out. We would like to have a government that acts and does not just follow the developments and promises that perhaps a leisure card will come at some point in the future. We demand action now.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Kulturministern Parisa Liljestrand (M)

Mr. Speaker! There is some other stuff to wish for regarding the worldview, I believe. We can at least state that we do not share the same worldview.

The reality that the member refers to is the reality that I, in my role as chairman of the municipal board for a municipality in Stockholm – that was before I took on the role I have now – was involved in managing to the highest degree, so I know what it looks like. I have done it myself, and I understand the challenges that municipalities and regions face. I have stood there myself. I have myself been forced to make the prioritizations that are required.

There is no difference now. It is in exactly the same way in the role I have now. In government, one must take responsibility and see society as it is - not as one wishes it were.

If the Social Democrats had done this during their eight years in power, that is, actually seen how it looked and taken responsibility for it, instead of living in a fantasy world and seeing society as they believed it to be, perhaps we would be in a different position today. But that does not prevent us from actually having to discuss that the Social Democrats de facto held government power for eight years and that the legacy we received is something that we in this government are working to clean up and get in order. It concerns everything from crime, criminality, and gang violence to defense and the general picture of society.

One must be able to carry out preventive measures, but we are in a situation where people's safety has become the great issue of freedom in our country. People must dare to go out onto the streets, and they must let their children go out onto the streets. Then we can talk about what other measures are needed in this country.

(Applause)

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)